S.F. developer fined — built 29 units on site zoned for 10
A San Francisco developer who illegally crammed 29 apartments into a housing complex in the Portola District that was approved for just 10 units has agreed to pay $1.2 million in fines to the city in addition to bringing the property into compliance with city building codes.
The development at 28692899 San Bruno Ave. is one of several flawed buildings City Attorney Dennis Herrera is investigating as part of a probe into corruption in San Francisco’s Department of Building Inspection. The investigation has led to the resignation of multiple senior building officials, including Bernard Curran, the senior inspector who gave final approvals to the San Bruno Avenue project, according to city records.
The city attorney alleges that the ownership group, which includes Yin Kwan Tam and Cindy Zhou Lee, violated multiple building codes and state housing laws in constructing the 2016 apartment complex: The developers failed to include the belowmarket rate unit
required by city law; kitchens and bathrooms were added without permits; and the building lacked the required second exit for tenants in case of a fire.
The builders did not follow the cityapproved plans on the “facade, design features, parking, stairs, restrooms, driveways, and landscaping,” according to the settlement. Instead of two units in each of the five connected buildings, they built six units in four and five in another, according to the city.
“The owners of these properties tried to cheat their way to more profit. That’s always a bad idea. They got caught,” said Herrera. “Now they must bring these buildings into compliance with the law — including fire safety and affordable housing requirements — and pay an appropriately steep price for their misconduct. We’re going to ensure that the playing field is level, and that breaking the law doesn’t pay.”
The building owner has applied for conditional use permits that would allow them to make the building compliant with building codes, according to Ryan Patterson, an attorney who represents the owners. It’s unclear how many of the units the city will legalize. Current zoning allows up to 14, but the city could give the owners a variance to exceed that number.
“Our game plan is to legalize as many of the units as possible without displacing tenants,” Patterson said at a public meeting earlier this week. “We fully appreciate the seriousness of the allegations and are doing everything we can to address them.”
The settlement is the latest twist in a saga that has roiled the small Portola District neighborhood for years, according to residents. While a 10unit building would not be significant in many neighborhoods, it was a big deal for San Bruno Avenue, the bustling main street of the Portola District, a lively workingclass enclave with a heavy Chinese population that sits just west of Highway 101.
Portola District resident Alex Hobbs, an architect, said that the neighborhood was initially excited for the project because it was San Bruno Avenue’s first significant mixeduse housing project in decades. The new residences and five handsome retail spaces — as designed — had potential to revive the southern end of the commercial strip known for its dim sum spots and produce markets.
“It had been an empty lot and a lot of people in the neighborhood were involved with the development team and architects in crafting the building,” he said. “It was exciting for San Bruno. It was going to be a nicelooking building and a welcome addition to the street.”
But it didn’t take long for people to realize that the developers essentially ripped up the approved design and put up an entirely different structure. The design variations meant to break up the building’s facade were absent. Instead of the highquality facade pictured in the architect’s renderings, the building had small vinyl windows, cheap siding, and stucco that is already cracking, Hobbs said. All of the architectural embellishments, including the clerestory windows on the retail spaces, had been left out.
“I saw it go up and I thought, ‘This turd is not what we were promised,’ ” Hobbs said.
Supervisor Hillary Ronen, who represents the Portola District, said her office has been trying to bring the building into compliance for years, but that the ordeal “all took on a greater urgency when we found out the connection to Bernie Curran.” She has scheduled a September hearing at the Land Use and Transportation Committee to explore “the lack of checks and balances at DBI and how they could have allowed this to happen.”
Building Inspection Department Deputy Director Christin Gasparac said the department is “in the process of forming an audit team to review projects associated with individuals under investigation to ensure code compliance and safety.”
The project has put the city in a tough spot, according to Ronen. While she would prefer to force the developer to start over, that would lead to the displacement of families. Instead, the city is in negotiations to force the developer to legalize as many of the existing units as possible.
“The owners need to be held accountable in a meaningful way,” she said. “If there were not tenants in the building things would have gone differently in terms of requiring them to convert the building to the allowed use.”
Nick Michael, who owns the Tierra Santa corner store across the street from the building, said that he hopes the units can be legalized and stay occupied.
“You’ve got families in there, workingclass people,” he said. “It’s a big Latino population. They come into the store. The more people around the neighborhood the better it is for business.”
He said the city is as much to blame as the developer.
“It should have been done right in the first place,” he said. “The city needs to wake up and pay attention. They should have been inspecting it step by step. You gotta blame both sides.”
Daniel Padilla, a hotel maintenance worker who lives in the San Bruno building with two toddler sons, said that he has enjoyed living there despite concerns about fire safety. He pays $3,000 a month for his twobedroom unit.
“It’s a pretty new building,” he said. “I know about the problems with the building, but we have fire alarms. I feel pretty secure.”
Hobbs said the situation may have remained under the radar if neighbors had not complained. At a time when residents in the Portola are divided over a proposed 63unit project on a Woolsey Street parcel that is home to abandoned greenhouses, the San Bruno fiasco hasn’t inspired confidence.
“This is why we have NIMBYism,” he said. “We felt like no one was paying any attention and no one seemed to care. How can the community trust anything being built in the neighborhood when the city let us down in such a major way?”